Data-Based Decisions

Academic Year 2024-2025

Two students completed Master’s Thesis Research with an average score above 4.0 for Learning Objectives 3 and 5. The average score was 3.9 (close to 4.0) for Learning Objective 4, as one of the two students received a score lower than 4.0 for Learning Objective 4. On a scale of 1-5, 1 stands for the lowest level of evidence and 5 for the highest level of evidence that a student meets the learning objectives. At faculty meetings in Spring 2024, the faculty reviewed and discussed the collected data and determined that no significant changes would be needed for the future assessment plan.

In Summer 2025, the university’s Office of Analysis, Assessment, and Accreditation also reviewed the collected data and offered suggestions for continuous improvement of program assessment.

Academic Year 2023-2024

A student completed Master’s Thesis Research with an average score above 4.0 for each of Learning Objectives 3, 4, and 5. On a scale of 1-5, 1 stands for the lowest level of evidence and 5 for the highest level of evidence that a student meets the learning objectives. At faculty meetings in Spring 2024, the faculty reviewed and discussed the collected data and determined that no major changes are needed for the future assessment plan.

In Summer 2024, the university’s Office of Analysis, Assessment, and Accreditation also reviewed the collected data and offered suggestions for continuous improvement of program assessment.

Academic Year 2022-2023

Seven students completed EED 6090 Developing an Engineering Education Curriculum with an average score above 4.0 for Learning Objective 1. Two students completed EED 6150 Teaching, Learning & Assessment in Engineering Education with an average score of 5.0 for Learning Objective 2. A student completed Master’s Thesis Research with an average score above 4.0 for each of Learning Objectives 3, 4, and 5.

On a scale of 1-5, 1 stands for the lowest level of evidence and 5 for the highest level of evidence that a student meets the learning objectives. At faculty meetings in Spring 2023, the faculty reviewed and discussed the collected data and determined that no major changes are needed for the future assessment plan. In Summer 2023, the university’s Office of Analysis, Assessment, and Accreditation also reviewed the collected data and offered suggestions for continuous improvement of program assessment.

Academic Year 2021-2022

The M.S. program was just established in July 2021. Data-based decisions are unavailable.

Academic Year 2020-2021

The M.S. program was just established in July 2021. Data-based decisions are unavailable.